IJR(IJR)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of IJR is remarkably concentrated in "Other," which is likely comprised of mid-cap stocks that don't fit into more traditional sectors, but still represent a significant portion of the portfolio at 5.8%. This suggests that the fund's holdings are skewed towards smaller and mid-sized companies rather than large-cap stalwarts. The remaining sector allocations are relatively minor, with Industrials and Technology each comprising just 0.5% of the portfolio.
The top holdings list reveals a mix of technology and industrials names, but no clear dominant theme emerges beyond a few mid-cap stocks. XTSLA is the largest holding at 1.7%, while several other positions are clustered around 0.6-0.8%. This suggests that IJR's portfolio is not overly reliant on any single stock, although the concentration of smaller and mid-cap names may introduce some idiosyncratic risk. A favorable macro environment for this portfolio would likely be one characterized by steady economic growth and moderate inflation, which should support the industrials and technology sectors represented here.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-06-12 07:25:05.847681+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 15/100The investment theme implied by the ticker IJR is large-cap U.S. equity, yet the provided holding data reveals a portfolio heavily weighted toward mid-to-small cap growth and technology stocks rather than established blue-chip giants. Holdings such as ViaVIation, FormFactor, and Sunstone Acquisition appear disproportionately focused on specific sectors like semiconductors and industrial services, lacking the broad diversification typical of a true large-cap fund. The absence of dominant mega-cap names in the top ten positions suggests that while the ETF may utilize a "large" classification for regulatory or indexing purposes, its actual composition leans heavily into smaller market capitalizations with higher volatility profiles inconsistent with traditional definitions of stability found in core large-cap strategies.
Sector coherence is notably weak given the sparse representation across healthcare, basic materials, and industrials within the top ten holdings, which collectively account for a mere fraction of the portfolio's weight despite being labeled as distinct sectors. The extremely low concentration metric indicates that no single sector or holding drives performance, yet this dispersion contradicts the expectation of thematic focus usually associated with named strategies. Instead of reflecting a cohesive narrative around large-cap stability, the fund appears to function more like a broad market proxy with an accidental tilt toward emerging growth names, making it difficult to distinguish from general index exposure based on these specific data points alone.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 12:27:44.573384+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe provided sector allocation data for IJR presents a significant anomaly that contradicts the fund's known mandate as an S&P Small-Cap 600 Index Tracker. While standard small-cap exposure typically distributes weight across Industrials, Financials, and Healthcare in substantial proportions, this dataset lists Healthcare at merely 0.6% with only one holding, alongside negligible weights for Basic Materials and other traditional sectors. This extreme skew suggests a data reporting error or a fundamental deviation from the index methodology, as such low diversification is inconsistent with a broad-based small-cap equity vehicle designed to mirror the entire S&P SmallCap 600 universe.
The composition of the top five holdings further highlights this structural irregularity. The inclusion of companies like VIAV and SANM alongside MOH indicates an attempt at sector representation, yet their combined weights are minimal relative to what would be expected in a true small-cap index where Industrials alone usually constitute over 15% of total assets. Furthermore, the top-10 concentration metric of 6.9% appears unusually low for a fund tracking nearly 2,000 stocks, implying either an aggregation error or that the listed holdings represent a non-representative slice of the actual portfolio. Without access to the full underlying index weights, these figures cannot be validated against standard benchmarks, raising questions about whether the displayed allocation reflects current reality or a system glitch.
From a factor tilt perspective, this distorted view obscures any meaningful analysis regarding value, size, or momentum exposures since sector neutrality is compromised by missing data points. The apparent lack of exposure to core small-cap drivers like Industrials and Financials prevents an assessment of how the fund might behave during cyclical shifts in those specific areas. Investors relying on these numbers alone would face substantial uncertainty when evaluating concentration risk, as the stated 0.6% weights for major sectors likely do not reflect the true economic footprint of the underlying holdings. Consequently, any conclusions drawn from this specific snapshot regarding sector rotation or factor efficiency remain speculative until verified against official index methodology and comprehensive holding lists.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 06:13:14.683132+00
ETF Look-Through Dashboard
Peer through the ETF wrapper to see exactly what you own. Every metric is computed from constituent-level data.
Weighted metrics calculated based on 41% of fund assets with available data.
Herfindahl-Hirschman Concentration Index
Morningstar-Style Box
Sector & Cap Explorer
ETF Fundamental Radar
Operational health is mixed, with the bulk of weight in the mid-range (4–6) Piotroski scores.
Piotroski F-Score (Operational Health)
Score 0-9: Measures Profitability, Leverage, and Efficiency
Based on 6% of fund weight with Piotroski data.
Computed by rolling up individual stock Piotroski F-Scores, Altman Z-Scores, and Beneish M-Scores weighted by each constituent's allocation.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryIJR is up 36.1% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +58.0%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 21.9% — the market is paying less per dollar of earnings than a year ago.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 5% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 10 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | XTSLA | BlackRock Cash Funds Treasury SL Agency | 1.69% | — | — |
| 2 | SANM | Sanmina Corp | 0.83% | 30.2x | 5/9 |
| 3 | SMTC | Semtech Corp | 0.83% | — | — |
| 4 | VIAV | Viavi Solutions Inc | 0.66% | — | 5/9 |
| 5 | VSAT | Viasat Inc | 0.64% | — | 6/9 |
| 6 | LUMN | Lumen Technologies Inc Ordinary Shares | 0.61% | — | 4/9 |
| 7 | FORM | FormFactor Inc | 0.57% | 136.2x | 4/9 |
| 8 | ESI | Element Solutions Inc Basic Materials | 0.56% | 42.6x | 5/9 |
| 9 | AGX | Argan Inc Industrials | 0.54% | 54.9x | 6/9 |
| 10 | ENPH | Enphase Energy Inc Technology | 0.52% | 54.0x | 6/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how IJR’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-06-16
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-06-15
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-06-14
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-06-13
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-06-12
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weightSource: SEC filings and fund provider disclosures. Shows last 6 snapshot dates, top 15 holdings per date by weight.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Computed from 1,200+ trading days with 5% risk-free rate.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
What Drove IJR Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current trading price of $136.27 for IJR establishes a specific position relative to its moving average envelope, though the precise distance from the upper or lower bands requires additional context on recent volatility and trend direction to fully assess mean-reversion potential. If this level sits near an outer boundary of the standard deviation channel, it suggests a statistically significant divergence that historically often precedes a pullback toward the central tendency represented by the simple moving average. Conversely, if the price remains comfortably within the middle third of the envelope, the asset may be exhibiting sustained momentum rather than immediate reversal characteristics. Without knowledge of whether the recent trend has been bullish or bearish over the relevant timeframe, it is difficult to determine if this specific price point represents an extended deviation warranting a statistical correction back toward equilibrium. Technical analysis typically posits that prices oscillate around their mean, and extreme readings relative to the SMA envelope can signal either exhaustion in the current direction or strong continuation depending on volume confirmation and market sentiment. Observers might note whether $136.27 aligns with historical support or resistance levels within this moving average framework to gauge the likelihood of a bounce versus a breakout scenario. Ultimately, the significance of this price level depends entirely on its relationship to the dynamic boundaries defined by the standard deviation bands over varying time horizons. A close proximity to an envelope edge could imply increased probability of regression toward the mean, while a position deep inside might suggest the prevailing trend has not yet lost
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the ETF's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Yield & Income
Sector Drift Over Time
How IJR’s sector allocation has shifted across snapshots. Use the slider to travel through time.
Active Conviction Tracker
Shares bought and sold between the latest two data snapshots — reveals what the fund manager is actually doing.
Explore More
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-16.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.